Russell Cole:

What were your goals/strategies with respect to the 2008 general election (presidential/congressional/local/etc.)? To what extent were these goals accomplished?

At this stage in our development, we see ourselves mainly as advocates for specific policies and reforms. Therefore, we did not endorse any candidates; although many candidates sought our endorsement. I should mention that we had a strong working relationship with the Ron Paul Campaign organizers as well as Ron Paul, himself, who has authored a number of articles that we have published for him using the populistamerica.com website.

We refuse to endorse candidates because we feel that it would detract from our specific agenda, which consists of the democratization of American society. Therefore, since no major candidate will ever take up democratization as his or her sole advocacy, we feel obliged to not offer endorsements to politicians.

We, essentially, see ourselves as working outside of the normative grid constituting American politics proper. We want to fundamentally change the political system. Therefore, we do not want to take any steps that would lead to our assimilation into the current sociopolitical establishment.

Did the party choose to formally endorse a candidate in any campaign? If so, what kind of support was the party able to give to the candidate or the party able to receive from the candidate?

As stated in the previous response, we did not offer any endorsements. We desire to institute direct democratic reforms along with political decentralization to American society. Therefore, it would be self-defeating for us to conform to the current grammar organizing American sociopolitical relationships.

What are the party’s prospects for the future?

We want to develop a People’s based movement insisting upon the democratization of American society, which involves the establishment of direct democratic institutions, such as initiatives, referenda, and recalls at all levels of American polity, including the Federal. Like Libertarians and Greens, we call for decentralization of political power.

However, we do not augment such an appeal with additional demands, such as insistences stating how economic relationships should be organized. This sets us apart from the Greens and Libertarians. We want to empower local communities so that they have the choice for themselves how they should structure their local economies.

Why does the party have such a strong relationship with Ron Paul, as opposed to any of the other 2008 presidential candidates? What specifically does he believe in and support that the Populist Party of America has such a strong connection to?

As far as Ron Paul is concerned, we found his platform appealing because he was minimalist. He advocated a return to constitutional principles, which included returning to Congress the sole authority to declare war; a power that should inhibit the President from electing to pursue diplomacy through militarism, barring instances where the country is under direct and immediate peril, which was not the case in the lead up to the Iraqi War, because there was no evidence that an attack against America was in the process of being initiated.

Additionally, along with Ron Paul, the Populist Party of America has advocated the dismantling of the Federal Reserve, primarily because it is an extrademocratic institution not beholden to the American public that, nevertheless, has the power to radically affect the populous through the policies that it adopts.

The Fed is interpreted as a device that merely serves the interests of Wall Street and the Investor class in American Society. Through the manipulation of interest rates, the Fed creates distortions in the economy, resulting in bubbles, which end in turmoil, after their deflation, for those employed in the artificially inflated sectors.

Furthermore, the Fed’s ability to introduce paper into economic circulation is tantamount to a regressive poor tax enacted upon the American public. Inflation might serve the interests of the investment class belonging to American society, but it is not in the interest of labor, because members of labor have their purchasing power reduced.

Please don’t feel compelled to answer this, but if it is not too personal, did you vote in this election? As a member of the populist party and a believer in the populist movement, who did you chose to vote for?

I voted for Ralph Nader in the Presidential election. I would have voted for Obama if I was voting in a state that was competitive. However, despite living on the East Coast, I continue to vote through absentee ballot in Illinois, and, of course, Obama was not about to lose Illinois to McCain.

McKinney, of course, attempted to use populous themes in her campaign, such as the populous slogan, “power to the people.” However, she seems too self absorbed. Additionally, her pick as a running candidate was somewhat of a slap in the face of the Green Party, since Clemente appeared to have little understanding of what the Green Party stood for; instead, emphasizing her own personal projects which she describes as hip-hop advocacy.

Bill Barr, of course, ran on the Libertarian ticket. However, his record in Congress was anything but libertarian. He voted for the Defense of Marriage Act and the Patriot Act.

Finally, in the past and for the future, how have you and how will you continue to recruit new members to the party? Do you rely primarily on the internet or other media, canvassing, etc.?

We are almost entirely electronic, which suites us well since it is through the Internet and its communicative possibilities that we have modeled our organizational structure: a decentralized organization that fails to include an integrated vertical hierarchy of offices that would create authoritarian figures in the party.

Therefore, we hope to build the movement by continuing to use information and Internet communications for its dissemination.

I have noticed, on the main populist America site, a great deal of right-libertarian rhetoric. End the Fed, Gold Standard, Ron Paul, no regulation, etc. Yet on your blog I see more liberal or left-libertarian ideas expressed. Is there a split between your thinking and the bloggers at the main populist America site? Does the populist party embrace both economic left and right or is it now, or becoming, a right-libertarian group?

This is an excellent question. I think the best way to answer it is to say that we accommodate all varieties of libertarian and populist thought, whether they come from the left or right of the ideological spectrum. Most importantly, however, we are all anti-establishment, believing that society is controlled by a minority that oftentimes acts on behalf of its own interests.

Also, whether we are on the left or the right, we all agree that certain social institutions need to be restructured, such as the Federal Reserve. I personally do not support a return to the gold standard, and I think it would be fairly dangerous for such a proposal to be implemented. Instead, I would support the democratization of the Federal Reserve so that its governors are accountable to the public or publicly elected officials.

Also, even on the Populist America website, you can find writings from journalists such as Dave Lindorff, who writes for The Nation among other publications, and he possesses more of a progressive sociopolitical ideology.

Russell Cole is the coordinator for the Midwest Populist Party.  Contact him at russellcole@populistamerica.com